Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of A Family in Tumult


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The one thing that seems obvious in this book is that Lacey expects the monarchy, in this case - embodied by William to act it has never before acted before. Why is that and what did he want William to do?
It is almost like Lacey places the unhappiness of all lesser royals firmly at the doorstep of the crown and other sibling to inherit. Margaret's unhappiness was all the Queen. Andrew, Edward and Anne is all Charles and the Queen and Harry is all William, Charles and HM.
Is it the crown's job to make a role for the lesser royals - even if it not something they want or ill suited. They made a role for Andrew - trade envoy. Did they think while Anne little niche works, okay - edward can do the scraps that okay - move on.
William isn't even the King yet - what was he supposed to do for Harry. Offer a joint monarchy? I don't think William has any power to determine anything yet and Harry doesn't have the patient to wait around for what might be.
But unfortunately I very much agree with Lacey that the issue of lesser royal to the main branch will need to be sorted out - before we have the same thread going to Louis and Charlotte.


I hate how some people like Lacey tries to infantilise Harry to the point that all of his shortcomings were never his fault and should be blamed on someone else.


For God's sake, he is 36 years old, he isn't that little boy who walked behind his mother coffin with his brother anymore.
 
I cannot really determine the overall opinion of The Royal Forum. However, from reading through the social media, the "Lazy Kate" mostly come from some Republicans (anti-monarchist), Meghan supporters and feminists. Some Meghan fans and 3rd/4th wave feminist have criticised Kate for not having a career before marriage and being "submissive" (i.e. by following protocol and keeping her head down) to the "archaic" "old, pale, stale, male" monarchy. :whistling:
Oh yes, the "male monarchy." In the last 183 years, the UK has had a king for only 51 of them. Victoria and Elizabeth II have a combined total of 132 years - and counting!
 
I hate how some people like Lacey tries to infantilise Harry to the point that all of his shortcomings were never his fault and should be blamed on someone else.


For God's sake, he is 36 years old, he isn't that little boy who walked behind his mother coffin with his brother anymore.

it does seem odd. I can't remember laceys' books that I read years ago.. but I thought that he was capable of being objective.. I haven't read this one, but from a lot of the quotes, the tendency seems to be blaming other people for all Harry's decisions.. ie it was Diana's fault for being a messed up person, and Charles' fault for not being a good husband... and Mostly it appears to be Williams fault for leading Harry into bad ways when he was all of 2 year older. Truth is, if its anyone's fault, I suspect it is down to Charles, because at the age where Harry was getting out of hand, Charles was the sole parent. And instead of being firm with him, I get the feeling that Charles was busy iwht his work, away a good deal, and probably uneasy about disciplining his son (and Will too) because he felt guilty about the marital problems and he did not want to be too hard on 2 boys who had lost their mother very tragically. I think WIll should have had a firm hand too, but Charles didn't apply it.. But I think its ridiculous to blame a boy like Will who is all of 2 years older than Harry, for not being able/willing to control his brother
 
Last edited:
it does seem odd. I can't remember laceys' books that I read years ago.. but I thought that he was capable of being objective.. I haven't read this one, but from a lot of the quotes, the tendency seems to be blaming other people for all Harry's decisions.. ie it was Diana's fault for being a messed up person, and Charles' fault for not being a good husband... and Mostly it appears to be Williams fault for leading Harry into bad ways when he was all of 2 year older. Truth is, if its anyone's fault, I suspect it is down to Charles, because at the age where Harry was getting out of hand, Charles was the sole parent. And instead of being firm with him, I get the feeling that Charles was busy iwht his work, away a good deal, and probably uneasy about disciplining his son (and Will too) because he felt guilty about the marital problems and he did not want to be too hard on 2 boys who had lost their mother very tragically. I think WIll should have had a firm hand too, but Charles didn't apply it.. But I think its ridiculous to blame a boy like Will who is all of 2 years older than Harry, for not being able/willing to control his brother

Harry and Harry alone is responsible for his decisions. No matter how poor a father you think Charles is or was, H was an adult when he chose to dress up as a Nazi, go to Vegas and get plastered, etc... That’s on him.
 
Well, this is interesting...

Personally I’m glad Lacey changed his mind because it’s clear everytime he’s interviewed that he loathes Charles, but...I loathe this comment because it’s completely disrespectful to Charles. I understand what be means, but Morgan is essentially erasing everything that the PoW has done.

The royal author had originally planned to write about Prince Charles and Prince Andrew, but he dropped that plan after talking to The Crown creator Peter Morgan, who advised: "They aren’t the princes that matter any more.”

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/ce...animosity-palace-meghan-the-crown-consultant/
 
That might explain why the research is so lacking, I was recently told that the saga of prince Andrew will be ongoing for another 10 years at least so any book at the moment would be shortsighted. William and Harry well, many more books can be coming out. That will be the gift that will keep giving.
 
I 100 % believe that William warned Harry to slow down and this is what started all of this. I do not see their relationship being repaired unless Harry divorces Meghan (And I do think this will happen one day).

I will always believe Meghan never had long hopes of staying in England. She wanted the title, the prince but not a life of doing Royal Duties.
 
I really don't see what the big deal is in being told by a sibling think twice or thrice about important life decisions. No matter the age, I would expect my own siblings to be extremely honest with me. Welcome or unwelcome, I expect them to tell me what they think and I would hope they know the advice will be taken well.

Maybe William overestimated their closeness...or his brother's maturity.

Because Harry is a hot head and yes he is somewhat immature. Look at him coming to America and pictures of him being naked with a random woman. We all know whatever concerns William shared went right back to Meghan.

Harry keeps implying about this bias he grew up with. I think that's shade at William maybe he thinks William was having an implicit bias about Meghan.
 
And Charlotte and Louis will both immediately go into fulltime royal duties in their late twenties without either of them considering a career on the way? I consider that extremely unlikely myself, considering the royal Houses of Europe.

Why wouldn't they? Charlotte will Princess Royal one day, it's likely her husband will be offered a title (Like Princess Anne's was). I think the future is King William, Queen Consort Kate, Prince George, Prince George's Wife, Princess Charlotte, Princess Charlotte husband, Prince Louis and Prince Louis wife.

I feel like the Wessex kids could be in the mix too. They will become automatic Prince and Princess when they turn 18 years old?

I would include Archie in this who will also become a Prince when Charles is King but this is only if Harry/Meghan divorce, Harry then may want him to bond with his family again.
 
not at all likely that the younger Cambridges will be expected to do royal duties, and certianly not their wives or husbands. Anne's husband was offered a title in the 1970s, there isn't the slightest possibility that Charlotte's husband will be offered one....
if the Harry mess has any relationship to other royals, it has probalby made teh RF think of the fate of younger children and has probalby made them decide that its best if only the heir and his wife/husband are expected to work as royals.
 
Mark Philips was offered a title, but they turned it down.
 
Mark Philips was offered a title, but they turned it down.

yes, and its not at all likely that any other husband of a princess would be offered a title. The queen possibly wanted her first grandchild to be born as something grander than Master Peter Phillips.. but that was a long time ago and I can't see that any future monarch would offer a title or have it accepted. I thtink that Harry MAY genuinely have a bit of a problem with being the second son and not want to be the son who becomes less popular as he gets older and slides down the succession, so they'll try to eliminate that with future younger sons.... by making it clear that they wont be asked to do royal duties and should trian for a career of their own.
 
I cannot really determine the overall opinion of The Royal Forum. However, from reading through the social media, the "Lazy Kate" mostly come from some Republicans (anti-monarchist), Meghan supporters and feminists. Some Meghan fans and 3rd/4th wave feminist have criticised Kate for not having a career before marriage and being "submissive" (i.e. by following protocol and keeping her head down) to the "archaic" "old, pale, stale, male" monarchy. :whistling:




I get that they're old pale and stale. But male? The queen has been in power forever. So were Victoria and Elizabeth I. They're old pale stale and female.
 
yes, and its not at all likely that any other husband of a princess would be offered a title. The queen possibly wanted her first grandchild to be born as something grander than Master Peter Phillips.. but that was a long time ago and I can't see that any future monarch would offer a title or have it accepted. I thtink that Harry MAY genuinely have a bit of a problem with being the second son and not want to be the son who becomes less popular as he gets older and slides down the succession, so they'll try to eliminate that with future younger sons.... by making it clear that they wont be asked to do royal duties and should trian for a career of their own.
I agree with that.
 
That might explain why the research is so lacking, I was recently told that the saga of prince Andrew will be ongoing for another 10 years at least so any book at the moment would be shortsighted. William and Harry well, many more books can be coming out. That will be the gift that will keep giving.

Well that’s true about Andrew, but the active rivalry between he and Charles is not really ongoing. I don’t count the PoW’s actions/beliefs with regards to his brother as part of this rivalry - I look at it as his genuinely being protective of the monarchy (William agreed/agrees and HM ultimately did/does so as well).

It seems to me that a book largely about the next King would be of historical interest, but very clearly Lacey was and is more interested in simply selling books. There’s nothing wrong with that per se, but if you’re an historian and you had a subject you truly wanted to write about, you don’t let yourself get persuaded NOT to by a Republican film/tv producer who is primarily concerned with ratings. Historians generally do not wrote books to become best sellers, they write books to inform. Lacey to me is no longer an historian, he’s a gossipy sell out.
 
Well that’s true about Andrew, but the active rivalry between he and Charles is not really ongoing. I don’t count the PoW’s actions/beliefs with regards to his brother as part of this rivalry - I look at it as his genuinely being protective of the monarchy (William agreed/agrees and HM ultimately did/does so as well).

Charles and Andrew have come to terms with each other over decades as adults. They no longer have a reason really to have a "feud". They know where they stand with each other, they know how each other thinks and they know how each other tends to relate and react to things. It'll be the same thing as time goes forward with William and Harry. Even though they're physically classified as "adults" now, the brothers haven't been actually been cemented in their roles and how they think of them and react to them for that long of a period.

When we think about it, William has only been "full time working royal" preparing for his life ahead as Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge and then King since 2017 when he quit working for EAAA. That's three years. Harry's been out of the Army since 2015 but he's also struggled with "new" roles to adapt and adjust to with marriage and family being the biggie these past couple of years.

Eventually William and Harry will be like Charles and Andrew. They'll know each other as brothers with their own minds and own ways of dealing with things and having opinions and ideas they may not like or agree with but one thing will remain. They will always remain being brothers and family.

Headline of the Future: George goes off the rails as Charlotte defies him by refusing to stop eating his cake while he's posing for photo ops!" Film at 11. :D
 
Last edited:
Let's not forget, with the Charles and Andrew relationship, that these brothers did not really grow up together. Unlike William and Harry, who were only two years and a bit apart, Andrew was nearly twelve years younger than Charles. By the time he was out of the nursery Charles (and Anne) had been away at school for years.

Those two brothers had quite a different upbringing to the second and third in line throughout W and H's youth, with Charles definitely treated as the heir to the throne within the family and without, from early childhood, while Andrew was the much indulged younger son of the monarch.
 
Last edited:
Very definitely true and very good points. Its the closeness in age of William and Harry too that has deemed them as a single entity over the years as "Diana's boys" and "WilliamandHarry" as in joint endeavors starting with the two of them with a joint Royal Foundation. They go their own separate ways as all adults tend to do, any disagreements and exchanges of different opinions and clashes between personalities end up being called a "feud" like the Hatfields and the McCoys (that lasted for generations and for the most part, with the descending generations even forgetting what the original "feud" was even about)

As time passes, I do believe that William and Harry will evolve into having their own cemented "adult" relationship where things can and will be amicable between the families and no need for "feuds". This feud is interesting right now and people like Lacey are latching onto it for big green dollars because its the ongoing process of establishing what their future relationship is going to be like.

Gotta muddy the water before you can pan it for gold. ;)
 
Charles and Andrew have come to terms with each other over decades as adults. They no longer have a reason really to have a "feud". They know where they stand with each other, they know how each other thinks and they know how each other tends to relate and react to things. It'll be the same thing as time goes forward with William and Harry. Even though they're physically classified as "adults" now, the brothers haven't been actually been cemented in their roles and how they think of them and react to them for that long of a period.

When we think about it, William has only been "full time working royal" preparing for his life ahead as Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge and then King since 2017 when he quit working for EAAA. That's three years. Harry's been out of the Army since 2015 but he's also struggled with "new" roles to adapt and adjust to with marriage and family being the biggie these past couple of years.

Eventually William and Harry will be like Charles and Andrew. They'll know each other as brothers with their own minds and own ways of dealing with things and having opinions and ideas they may not like or agree with but one thing will remain. They will always remain being brothers and family.

Headline of the Future: George goes off the rails as Charlotte defies him by refusing to stop eating his cake while he's posing for photo ops!" Film at 11. :D

I’m glad there’s no current feud between Charles and Andrew ...which, maybe it’s just as well that Lacey didn’t write that book as that does seem like old news. I recall Anne joking that her conversations with Charles about issues they disagree on are very short, lol. I think that’s the way to handle these things - respect the others’ opinions and agree to disagree.

See, I think that about W and H, also. Unlike Lacey and some others, I’m not ever going to say that they’ll never be close again or they’ll never reconcile. Time will tell... but regardless of how it plays out, of course they will always love each other.

?????
 
I’m glad there’s no current feud between Charles and Andrew ...which, maybe it’s just as well that Lacey didn’t write that book as that does seem like old news. I recall Anne joking that her conversations with Charles about issues they disagree on are very short, lol. I think that’s the way to handle these things - respect the others’ opinions and agree to disagree.

See, I think that about W and H, also. Unlike Lacey and some others, I’m not ever going to say that they’ll never be close again or they’ll never reconcile. Time will tell... but regardless of how it plays out, of course they will always love each other.

?????

I doubt if charles and Andrew are the best fof friends, as Charles was probably the one pushing for him to be benched.. (not that they had much choice). Depends if Andrew accepts that he's screwed up badly and is not going ot ever push for acceptance again as a royal. And I'd say Will and Harry are not best of friends at present.. I dont know if they will recover their old friendship.
 
I doubt if charles and Andrew are the best fof friends, as Charles was probably the one pushing for him to be benched.. (not that they had much choice). Depends if Andrew accepts that he's screwed up badly and is not going ot ever push for acceptance again as a royal. And I'd say Will and Harry are not best of friends at present.. I dont know if they will recover their old friendship.

I sincerely would hope they don't recover the "old friendship" but come to a realization and acceptance of each other as adults in their own worlds and have an even better and stronger relationship than they've had before. ?
 
I dont know if its all that likely. THey are on separate paths, I think that its not like Harry will come home much, esp in the next few years and the gap between them may take some time to heal.
 
Very definitely true and very good points. Its the closeness in age of William and Harry too that has deemed them as a single entity over the years as "Diana's boys" and "WilliamandHarry" as in joint endeavors starting with the two of them with a joint Royal Foundation. They go their own separate ways as all adults tend to do, any disagreements and exchanges of different opinions and clashes between personalities end up being called a "feud" like the Hatfields and the McCoys (that lasted for generations and for the most part, with the descending generations even forgetting what the original "feud" was even about)

As time passes, I do believe that William and Harry will evolve into having their own cemented "adult" relationship where things can and will be amicable between the families and no need for "feuds". This feud is interesting right now and people like Lacey are latching onto it for big green dollars because its the ongoing process of establishing what their future relationship is going to be like.

Gotta muddy the water before you can pan it for gold. ;)

It’s kind of like identical twins, where people assume they are the same person. I think the separation may end up being good for them, although both of them are going to need to forgive each other...
 
yes, and its not at all likely that any other husband of a princess would be offered a title. The queen possibly wanted her first grandchild to be born as something grander than Master Peter Phillips.. but that was a long time ago and I can't see that any future monarch would offer a title or have it accepted. I thtink that Harry MAY genuinely have a bit of a problem with being the second son and not want to be the son who becomes less popular as he gets older and slides down the succession, so they'll try to eliminate that with future younger sons.... by making it clear that they wont be asked to do royal duties and should trian for a career of their own.

Well if Mark Phillis had a title, he would have been Prince Peter Phillips and Zara would be a Princess.

If Harry is truly bitter about being 2nd, then that is on him. He never seemed to be upset before until he married Meghan or he was really good at hiding his bitterness. His wife, him were both entitled to perform Royal duties and their son is entitled to a title when Charles is King. He's in no different spot that Charlotte & Louis right now. This is just an opinion, I think it is Meghan who doesn't like being behind Kate and William. She thought having a title would put her out there more but nope you come behind the Queen, Charles/Camila, Kate/William and then Harry/Meghan. She doesn't like the royalty order in my opinion.
 
not at all likely that the younger Cambridges will be expected to do royal duties, and certianly not their wives or husbands. Anne's husband was offered a title in the 1970s, there isn't the slightest possibility that Charlotte's husband will be offered one....
if the Harry mess has any relationship to other royals, it has probalby made teh RF think of the fate of younger children and has probalby made them decide that its best if only the heir and his wife/husband are expected to work as royals.

It could be possible. Just like Mark Phillips was offered one, HRH Princess Charlotte will be in line to succeed George.
 
Well if Mark Phillis had a title, he would have been Prince Peter Phillips and Zara would be a Princess.

If Mark Phillips had accepted a title, it would have been a *peerage* title only.

People are either a) *born* prince(ss) or b) *marry* a prince (its only applicable to females at this time) or one is c) *created* a prince as the monarch *created* Philip as a prince of the UK.
 
Well if Mark Phillis had a title, he would have been Prince Peter Phillips and Zara would be a Princess.

Iike the royalty order in my opinion.

No, not at all. Mark would have been offered a peerage, not a royal title and his children would probalby have been Viscount X and Lady Zara Phillips. husbands of Princesses were offered earldoms in the past..but that's not going to happen now...
 
It could be possible. Just like Mark Phillips was offered one, HRH Princess Charlotte will be in line to succeed George.

Mark wasnt offered a royal title, as I've said, and it was never likely even in the 70s that he'd be expected to be "on royal duties". He had his own career as a h horseman and in the army...
And Charlotte is pretty unlikely to be doing more than a few token royal duties. She is only George's heir till he has children of his own and the odds are that she'll be educated to find her own working life.
sorry i know this has gone off topic but Im trying to state that I think from now on, a younger child whihc is what Harry is, wont be expected to do royal duties....
 
Last edited:
Lacey is updating his book:

Prince William ‘split his household from Prince Harry after Meghan bullying claims’ (The Times, behind paywall)

Archive

"So, are you saying,” asked Oprah Winfrey, talking to Meghan and Harry in their famous interview of March 2021, “that there were hints of jealousy?”
She was inquiring about the Sussexes’s wildly successful tour of Australia and the South Pacific of late October 2018, and the couple shifted uncomfortably in their plush wicker chairs.

(...)

“It really changed,” he said, “after the Australia tour, after our South Pacific tour . . . it was . . . the first time that the family got to see how incredible she is at the job. And that brought back memories.”

Memories of what? Again Harry shied away from putting words to the almost unmentionable. But Oprah had prepared and polished this moment, like so many others in the interview, and she had a reference ready to prompt her prince’s revelation. The latest, fourth season of TV’s The Crown had depicted Charles and Diana’s 1983 tour of Australia, showing how Diana had been “bedazzling” in her ability “to connect with people”. Episode six had depicted how the crowds would groan when they realised that Charles, not Diana, was walking down their side of the street — hence the beginnings of the “jealousy” on the family’s part.

(...)

When trying to define the moment that marked the decisive rift with his brother William — the break-up and actual separation of the joint household they had established together in 2009 — Harry would fix upon his triumphant return with Meghan from their Australian tour at the end of October 2018. But if asked the same question, William would have fixed on a more specific event: the explosive argument he had had with his brother earlier that month.

(...)

Then five months later came the conclusive and determining rupture — the division that has lasted to the present day — though here the brothers’ retelling of history diverged. As Harry explained it to Oprah, Meghan’s Australian tour success sowed the jealousies that caused feelings to “change”. According to this scenario, William and Kate resented the Diana-like popularity that was generated by Harry’s wife. William had a different recollection.

We now know that Princes William and Harry were no longer on speaking terms before the Sussexes set off for Australia. Feelings had already “changed”, as Harry put it, and drastically so. The brothers had parted on extremely poor terms, with the trouble centring on Meghan’s stringent treatment and alleged bullying of her staff.

Most Kensington Palace courtiers were noted for the comparatively long tenures of their comfortable and prestigious jobs. But it came to look as if employees could not wait to escape service with Harry and Meghan. Those who left formed themselves into an informal fraternity that they titled the “Sussex Survivors’ Club”. They had finally hit back, and their organising agent had been PR man Jason Knauf.

(...)

Then five months later came the conclusive and determining rupture — the division that has lasted to the present day — though here the brothers’ retelling of history diverged. As Harry explained it to Oprah, Meghan’s Australian tour success sowed the jealousies that caused feelings to “change”. According to this scenario, William and Kate resented the Diana-like popularity that was generated by Harry’s wife. William had a different recollection.

We now know that Princes William and Harry were no longer on speaking terms before the Sussexes set off for Australia. Feelings had already “changed”, as Harry put it, and drastically so. The brothers had parted on extremely poor terms, with the trouble centring on Meghan’s stringent treatment and alleged bullying of her staff.

Most Kensington Palace courtiers were noted for the comparatively long tenures of their comfortable and prestigious jobs. But it came to look as if employees could not wait to escape service with Harry and Meghan. Those who left formed themselves into an informal fraternity that they titled the “Sussex Survivors’ Club”. They had finally hit back, and their organising agent had been PR man Jason Knauf.

(...)

But as the months went by the American’s feelings became more ambiguous, as numerous colleagues — women whom he greatly respected — continued to bring him stories of what they said they had suffered at Meghan’s hands.

(...)

The b-word featured prominently in the accounts of several, along with an even more sinister set of initials: PTSD. Post-traumatic stress disorder was a deeply serious condition to allege — flashbacks, nightmares and feelings of deep anxiety — but that was how one complainant said that they had felt.

Several people maintained they had been “humiliated” by the duchess, and that criticism extended to Harry as well.

“I overheard a conversation between Harry and one of his top aides,” recalled one Kensington Palace courtier. “Harry was screaming and screaming down the phone. Team Sussex was a really toxic environment. People shouting and screaming in each other’s faces.”

(...)

The moment the prince heard the bullying allegations, he related to this friend, he got straight on the phone to talk to Harry — and when Harry flared up in furious defence of his wife, the elder brother persisted. Harry shut off his phone angrily, so William went to speak to him personally. The prince was horrified by what he had just been told about Meghan’s alleged behaviour, and he wanted to hear what Harry had to say.

(...)

William felt deeply wounded. “Hurt” and “betrayed” were the two feelings that he described to his friend. The elder brother had always felt so protective. He had seen it as his job to look out for Harry but this was the moment the protection had to stop. At the end of the day the British crown and all it stood for with its ancient traditions, styles and values — the mission of the monarchy — had to matter more to William than his brother did.

Harry, for his part, was equally furious that William should give credence to the accusations against Meghan, and he was fiercely combative in his wife’s defence. Some sources maintain that in the heat of the argument Harry actually accused someone in the family of concepts that were “racist”. But it must be stressed that neither brother has ever confirmed that the hateful r-word was used face to face.

(...)

And so ... the narrative change :ermm:
Another season of the Crown? :whistling:
 
Even after reading Valentine Low's article on the bullying allegation published on March this year, I still find the subject of Meghan's allege mistreatment of staff very explosive and intense. Again, the allegation of Meghan mistreating staff is nothing new, because these stories have been circulating in the tabloids/gossip columns since the Pacific tour and it's only The Times have picked them up this year. There is a big difference between strict/firm employer with high expectation and nasty/bullying employer who abuses staff by exploiting his/her position. I have work with people higher up with strict standards, but approachable and understanding in terms of personal wellbeing.

The cultural clash is again mentioned in the book extract, where most Palace staffs were treated more like collaborative colleagues or even family members rather than employees ranked beneath the employers. Perhaps personality clash or differing priorities/opinions may have come into play, not just the bullying allegation, but also the rift between William and Harry (e.g. Duty v.s. Love)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom